Yes, but what Ms. Merkel is basing her conclusion on is unclear. I don’t doubt Ms. Merkel’s saying the words she said; I doubt that she is basing it on a concrete statement from Ms. Rice.
There are two reasons I doubt it:
If the US is in fact guilty in this instance, Ms. Rice would be making an admission of liability that directly affects an existing civil suit. She’s simply too smart and too professional to do that.
If the US is NOT guilty in this instance, Ms. Rice would obviously have no reason to admit to guilt.
Either way, it’s very unlikely Ms. Rice would admit, directly, culpability.
Sorry, that’s not what I meant. We all should certainly get more facts before getting all jiggy with it. I was basically commenting on the fact that there’s not going to be any sort of specific mea culpa coming from either the CIA or the current administration, since neither has ever been terribly effusive in that regard.
The fact is, it’s mighty damn hard to pin anything on the CIA, since they have vast areas of endeavor that are, by design, not subject to public accountability. These types of rendition, I would presume, are not heavy on documentation or eyewitnesses, by design. They’re secret operations. And hey, they’re the CIfreakinA, and generally speaking, they don’t leave big red-hot smoking guns lying around, either. We will have a great deal of difficulty getting to the bottom of this. My kids might see a feeble one-liner in the Post 50 years from now.
It’s kind of a catch-22 for people who just really want to know the truth.
Is anyone listening to NPR? I heard earlier that Condi was going to be interviewed (should be about right now). Maybe she’ll say something that clears things up.
Mr. Bricker, it really is hard for me to tell you how much my opinion of you has dropped in this thread. Multiple sources citing multiple intelligence officials combined with implicit public acknowledgement from the administration, specific claims from the victim supported by several key objective facts such as his appearance in Albania, and you’re running games with, “where’s the evidence.”
I will confess that I thought the extra sixty days did set this apart somewhat from your garden variety snatch and scratch operation
why now? I thought there was really no *ambiguity surrounding the material facts of this lawsuit, and I think you will shortly see money change hands, or a succsseful motion for summary judgement.
I rather doubt that the US can even prduce a verified answer denying Al Masri’s allegations under penalty of perjury, let alone the sort of detailed affidavits that would be required to defeat plaintiff’s motion .
In my innocence, I thought even the most brainwashed chest-thumper would blush to try to weasel out of this particular atrocity–Bricker and Shodan proved me hopelessly naive.
Because we all know that if it WAS an alien abduction, they would use that mind ray thing on him, and make him THINK he had been snatched by the CIA–but that’s just the coverup.
Unless you guys can PROVE that it wasn’t aliens, and that al-Masri wasn’t brain-rayed, I’m going to insist that we cnsider this a open controversy to which balanced and fair analysis demands acknowledging there are two sides.
’
If Condi came out today and categorically denied apologizing for this specific act, would that change your mind? If not, then I don’t think continued debate on this subject is usefull.
I am a plaintiffs’ counel, so I cna’t pretend to understand the defense guys, but sometimes legal liability is not the be and end all.
If I were running this case, I would ask Al M if 100 million was enough, and I would arrange for Condi Rice , Angela Merkel AND the twins to do things to him that good Muslim men are not even supposed to know about, on national TV, while George writes over and over on the blafckboard “I will not Be such an asshole”.
WATEVER THE FUCK IT TAKES to show the world how sorry we are, because we can’t be sorry enough!!
Yeah, that was kinda my point to Bricker. Rice is a pol, and a loyal senior Bush Administration official. The political considerations are virtually the be and end all, not the small box of legal mechanics that **Bricker ** is once again trying to shoehorn a debate into. The government’s liability in this suit is just not a consideration at all to those responsible - hell, it isn’t their own money at stake anyway, only their public standing and its effect on their political power.
It appears at one time there was a (alleged) beating. “Torture” seems to be a pretty large stretch, however- “abuse” and “a beating” would be a better choice of words. If his story is correct, he certainly has a valid complaint, whether we can call it “torture” or no.
It also appears that there is some pretty strong evidence that (at least at one time) the *CIA * was involved. Not nessesarily with the "beating’, but at several points.
My guess is that the CIA fucked up, and we owe this guy an apology and a big check- and some dudes need to get their asses fired. I don’t really blame then for the original 'snatch"; but the beating was wrong, and after they found he was the wrong dude, they needed to sit him down, apologize, and offer a breifcase full of cash.
Still, I disagree with the term “torture” here. “Abuse” is a better term, considering his own complaint.
Whether we admit it was the CIA (or not) is rapidly becoming irrelevant. The German press & public are going bat-shit crazy over this and the pressure on the German government is getting intolerable. I imagine we’ll have who-what-when and where (to the extent Germany knows) before another week or two goes by.
Actually, no. I had this thread open from this morning and hit quick-reply without reloading it when I got back from class. Thank you for being reasonable.
Quite true, and for myself I’m currently in ‘wait and see’ mode on this one. I wonder if you caught this part of the article you cited though:
Bolding mine. It makes me wonder how accurate anything coming out of Germany will be…unless the German government themselves make a direct statement with reguards to this.
Your quoted material says some conservative media is of the opinion the rest of the papers are hyping the story. Of course they’re of that opinion. So what?